As for Grim's idea of pre-release testing, it defenately has some good points in it, it will expose the game to quite a lot of uncontrolled computers, and give the company the change to immunize the game against a lot of small little "computer bugs" too that will affect the game.
But i think the idea of pre-selling should be refined a bit, before it can come into action...
Yes let the pre-testers buy the game (at normal rate, or a slightly reduced rate), but the testers should be screened.... not anyone will qualify to test the game.
Throw in a bonus of once the game is 99.9% bug free, or when the game goes gold, to get the new and final copy of the game (that you have already paid for)
The advantage that large companies have with beta testing, is that they have sooo many more computers to test it on, and also they have their registered beta testers (working on various more computers running in various stages of software-decay).
If the issue of copy protection is a big issue, write a fatal bug in the program, so that it will not function after a certain date - i know its not fool proof, but there is soo many combinations of protection that you can add, as with the final product. In anycase, if someone WANTS to re-produce a game they will, state of the art protection or not. Then let it rather be the beta, which has no support on it (other than when it is in beta stage). The person that comes to a forum with beta problems, are invited to run into as many brick walls as he/she wants to.
To sum it up, i think grim has a very brilliant idea. If that idea gets refined, it will make finding bugs a LOT easier and more complete.
I would also love to make the "debug your computer" idea more public, but since people love to rather point fingers at the developer... this is a more difficult point...
